https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244787 CENVAT credit on re-imported rejected goods was considered prima facie eligible where duty had been paid on removal and the goods were brought back under Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for re-making, refining, re-conditioning or other reasons. Even so, the applicant did not establish a case for complete waiver of pre-deposit in the stay proceedings. Balancing revenue interests with stay principles, only partial relief was granted and the appellant was directed to deposit 50% of the disputed credit, with the balance stayed pending appeal. en-us Tue, 17 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Mar 2014 05:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244787 CENVAT credit on re-imported rejected goods was considered prima facie eligible where duty had been paid on removal and the goods were brought back under Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for re-making, refining, re-conditioning or other reasons. Even so, the applicant did not establish a case for complete waiver of pre-deposit in the stay proceedings. Balancing revenue interests with stay principles, only partial relief was granted and the appellant was directed to deposit 50% of the disputed credit, with the balance stayed pending appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244787